Valeurs seuils pour le rapport coût-efficacité en soins de santé - KCE

62 ICER Thresholds KCE Reports 100
7 REFERENCES
1. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical
practices. N Engl J Med. 1977;296(13):716-21.
2. Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, O'Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the Economic
Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (Third Edition). Oxford University Press, editor.
Oxford; 2005.
3. Morris S, Devlin N, Parkin D. Economic Analysis in Health Care. 1 ed. West Sussex: John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2007.
4. Gold M, Siegel J, Russell L, Weinstein M. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford:
Oxford University Press; 1996.
5. McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE Cost-Effectiveness Threshold: What it is and
What that Means. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(9):733-44.
6. Rutigliano MJ. Cost effectiveness analysis: a review. Neurosurgery. 1995;37(3):436-43;
discussion 43-4.
7. Siegel JE, Torrance GW, Russell LB, Luce BR, Weinstein MC, Gold MR. Guidelines for
pharmacoeconomic studies. Recommendations from the panel on cost effectiveness in health
and medicine. Panel on cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Pharmacoeconomics.
1997;11(2):159-68.
8. Brouwer WB, Koopmanschap MA. On the economic foundations of CEA. Ladies and
gentlemen, take your positions! J Health Econ. 2000;19(4):439-59.
9. Wagstaff A. QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off. J Health Econ. 1991;10(1):21-41.
10. Williams A. Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the 'fair innings' argument. Health Econ.
1997;6(2):117-32.
11. Bleichrodt H. Health utility indices and equity considerations. J Health Econ. 1997;16(1):65-91.
12. Dowie J. Why cost-effectiveness should trump (clinical) effectiveness: the ethical economics of
the South West quadrant. Health Econ. 2004;13(5):453-9.
13. Donaldson C, Currie G, Mitton C. Cost effectiveness analysis in health care: contraindications.
BMJ. 2002;325(7369):891-4.
14. Australian Department of Health and Aging. Guidelines for preparing submissions to the
Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (version 4.2). In: Pharmaceutical Benefits
Advisory Committee; 2007.
15. Barton P, Bryan S, Robinson S. Modelling in the economic evaluation of health care: selecting
the appropriate approach. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004;9(2):110-8.
16. College voor Zorgverzekeringen (CVZ). Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic research, updated
version. In. Diemen: CVZ; 2006.
17. Bryan S, Williams I, McIver S. Seeing the NICE side of cost-effectiveness analysis: a qualitative
investigation of the use of CEA in NICE technology appraisals. Health Econ. 2007;16(2):179-93.
18. Cleemput I, Van Wilder P, Vrijens F, Huybrechts M, Ramaekers D. Guidelines for
Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations in Belgium. Health Technology assessment (HTA). Bruxelles:
Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE); 2008. KCE Reports 78C (D/2008/10.273/27)
Available from: http://kce.fgov.be/index_en.aspx?SGREF=5213&CREF=11009
19. Griebsch I, Coast J, Brown J. Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical
review of published cost-utility studies in child health. Pediatrics. 2005;115(5):e600-14.
20. Scuffham PA, Whitty JA, Mitchell A, Viney R. The use of QALY weights for QALY calculations:
a review of industry submissions requesting listing on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits
Scheme 2002-4. Pharmacoeconomics.26(4):297-310.
21. Read JL, Quinn RJ, Berwick DM, Fineberg HV, Weinstein MC. Preferences for health
outcomes. Comparison of assessment methods. Med Decis Making.4(3):315-29.
22. Hornberger JC, Redelmeier DA, Petersen J. Variability among methods to assess patients' wellbeing
and consequent effect on a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45(5):505-
12.
23. Marra CA, Marion SA, Guh DP, Najafzadeh M, Wolfe F, Esdaile JM, et al. Not all "qualityadjusted
life years" are equal. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(6):616-24.